HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cody, D. D. Articles by Ginsberg, L. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cody, D. D. Articles by Ginsberg, L. E.

Multi–Detector Row CT Artifacts That Mimic Disease¹

¹ From the Division of Diagnostic Imaging, University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030. Received August 17, 2004; revision requested October 19; final revision received November 4; accepted December 15. Address correspondence to D.D.C. (e-mail: dcody{at}mdanderson.org).

View larger version (83K): [in a new window]   Figure 1a. Transverse CT images numbered (a) 15, (b) 19, and (c) 23 in the image set obtained in a patient examined with scanner A show a hyperattenuating pseudolesion (arrow).

View larger version (74K): [in a new window]   Figure 1b. Transverse CT images numbered (a) 15, (b) 19, and (c) 23 in the image set obtained in a patient examined with scanner A show a hyperattenuating pseudolesion (arrow).

View larger version (62K): [in a new window]   Figure 1c. Transverse CT images numbered (a) 15, (b) 19, and (c) 23 in the image set obtained in a patient examined with scanner A show a hyperattenuating pseudolesion (arrow).

View larger version (43K): [in a new window]   Figure 2. Transverse CT images from two patients examined with scanner A show variable location of the hyperattenuating artifact (arrow).

View larger version (111K): [in a new window]   Figure 3a. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (110K): [in a new window]   Figure 3b. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (115K): [in a new window]   Figure 3c. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (112K): [in a new window]   Figure 3d. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (114K): [in a new window]   Figure 3e. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (113K): [in a new window]   Figure 3f. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (113K): [in a new window]   Figure 3g. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (112K): [in a new window]   Figure 3h. Transverse CT images obtained in the water phantom for quality assurance with scanner A (a–d) before and (e–h) after calibration. Each image represents data from one detector row. The quality of c is clearly compromised by an artifact (arrow). Images generated with data from the first and second detector rows (a, b) also contain the artifact, but it is subtle and would not affect the clinical quality of the image. No artifact is visible on images acquired after scanner calibration by the field service engineer.

View larger version (84K): [in a new window]   Figure 4a. Transverse CT images numbered (a) 10, (b) 14, (c) 18, and (d) 22 in the image set obtained in a patient examined with scanner B show a hypoattenuating artifact (arrow) that is less apparent on some images than on others because of the presence of normal anatomic structures. When the artifact appears in the intraventricular region, as in c, and has approximately the same attenuation as that of cerebrospinal fluid, it is nearly invisible.

View larger version (91K): [in a new window]   Figure 4b. Transverse CT images numbered (a) 10, (b) 14, (c) 18, and (d) 22 in the image set obtained in a patient examined with scanner B show a hypoattenuating artifact (arrow) that is less apparent on some images than on others because of the presence of normal anatomic structures. When the artifact appears in the intraventricular region, as in c, and has approximately the same attenuation as that of cerebrospinal fluid, it is nearly invisible.

View larger version (86K): [in a new window]   Figure 4c. Transverse CT images numbered (a) 10, (b) 14, (c) 18, and (d) 22 in the image set obtained in a patient examined with scanner B show a hypoattenuating artifact (arrow) that is less apparent on some images than on others because of the presence of normal anatomic structures. When the artifact appears in the intraventricular region, as in c, and has approximately the same attenuation as that of cerebrospinal fluid, it is nearly invisible.

View larger version (68K): [in a new window]   Figure 4d. Transverse CT images numbered (a) 10, (b) 14, (c) 18, and (d) 22 in the image set obtained in a patient examined with scanner B show a hypoattenuating artifact (arrow) that is less apparent on some images than on others because of the presence of normal anatomic structures. When the artifact appears in the intraventricular region, as in c, and has approximately the same attenuation as that of cerebrospinal fluid, it is nearly invisible.

View larger version (87K): [in a new window]   Figure 5. Transverse CT images from four patients examined with scanner B show variable location of the hypoattenuating artifact (arrow). The location of this artifact varied more widely than did that of the hyperattenuating artifact from scanner A, because of differences in patient positioning within the gantry.